Case law

State ex rel. Juvenile Department v. Campbell

178 Or. App. 271 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 5, 2001

The juvenile court undoubtedly qualifies as a sending agency under that description. … We note that there is no dispute in this case that the type of guardianship established by the court pursuant to ORS 419B.370 constitutes “foster care” for purposes of Article 111(a) of the compact. ORS 417.200.

McDuffy, Edwards & Associates, Inc. v. Peripheral Systems, Inc.

93 Or. App. 226 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 5, 1988

of the invoice, McDuffy-Edwards warrants placements to the extent if, for any reason, the employee leaves the position secured through McDuffy-Edwards within 60 days of the starting date, McDuffy-Edwards will provide a qualified … and unambiguously establish the intent to apply the fee limitations to employer-paid fees, as well.

Horner's Market v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District

2 Or. App. 288 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 26, 1970

. “* * * [I]f one principle clearly emerges from the numerous decisions of this Court dealing with taxation it is that the Due Process Clause affords no immunity against mere inequalities in tax burdens, nor does it afford … In Hadley, supra, the Court limited its decision to a situation where each qualified voter is given the same power in an election “open to all.”

State v. Vogh

179 Or. App. 585 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 20, 2002

But that same right is implicated by any number of other objections that do not qualify as “structural error.” … Thus, in cases of actual misconduct, in which a juror engages in deliberations that in some way violates his or her oath, “the verdict will stand unless the evidence clearly establishes that the misconduct constitutes a serious

Lowe v. Keisling

130 Or. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 1, 1994

Appling, supra, as being the more clearly reasoned and stating the correct rule, which is: Courts have jurisdiction and authority to determine whether a proposed initiative or referendum measure is one of the type authorized … “(b) An initiative law may be proposed only by a petition signed by a number of qualified voters equal to six percent of the total number of votes cast for all candidates for Governor at the election at which a Governor was

State v. Kayfes

213 Or. App. 543 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 27, 2007

Although the court granted her immunity, K continued to refuse to testify and was held in contempt. See ORS 33.015(2); ORS 33.085. … Lastly, the evidence established that K and defendant had entered into and attempted to carry out a “suicide pact.”

Schleiss v. SAIF Corp.

250 Or. App. 458 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 13, 2012

Under ORS 656.214(2), work-disability benefits are available only to otherwise-qualified injured workers who have not been released to their regular work “by the attending physician or nurse practitioner.” … See OAR 436-030-0020(2)(a) (indicating that a closing examination is not required where the attending physician’s written statement clearly states that there is no permanent impairment or reasonable expectation of loss of

State v. Westlund

75 Or. App. 43 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 21, 1985

Although that rationale is clearly a correct one, the Supreme Court majority declined to follow it as the basis for its decision. … 1983) (application of Article I, section 9, to a person’s house does not depend on showing an expectation of privacy; the purpose of Katz is to extend protection beyond what the Fourth Amendment literally protects, not to qualify

City University v. Office of Educ. Policy

126 Or. App. 459 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 23, 1994

That is sufficient to establish that plaintiff is engaged in interstate commerce. See U.S. v. … OAR 583-30-015(5). [2] In addition, OAR 583-30-035(23) provides: "Notwithstanding the absence of a specific standard or prohibition in this rule, no school authorized to offer academic degrees or seeking to qualify for such

State v. Engen

164 Or. App. 591 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 29, 1999

The court echoed, and apparently endorsed, our view that the qualifying phrase “that necessarily requires a culpable mental state” “was meant to distinguish those elements defining the substance or quality of the forbidden … First, in determining whether ORS 813.010 “clearly indicates a legislative intent to dispense with any culpable mental state requirement,” the court reviewed the history of DUII statutes in Oregon.

School District No. 1 v. Multnomah County Education Service District

78 Or. App. 247 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 26, 1986

Subparagraph (B) of the rule clearly authorizes an inquiry *257 into whether studies conducted under ORS 330.535 support the plan. … Under its authority to evaluate a plan, the Board has the power to establish standards for its evaluation consistent with the legislative scheme, and it did so here.

State v. Lovern

234 Or. App. 502 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 31, 2010

There — it’s an unusual appearance to have that level of notching but it’s not so specific that it indicates that there was clearly an injury there before.” … In sum, “[t]he experts were all qualified, the techniques used are generally accepted, the procedures rely on specialized literature in the field, and the procedures used are not novel.

State v. Soto

21 Or. App. 794 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 23, 1975

The mere fact that such a claim of immunity is asserted because of religious convictions is not sufficient to establish its constitutional validity.' * * *" 206 Or. at 229-30 , 292 P.2d at 138 . … Not only is such a result in my view clearly contrary to Sherbert, Cantwell and Reynolds , but it effectively nullifies the religious freedom guarantees, supra, of the federal and Oregon constitutions.

State v. Ott

61 Or. App. 576 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 16, 1983

He argues that here the state had already obtained one psychiatric examination as a matter of right under ORS 163.135(5) and had to establish a necessity for a second. Assuming that the second examination by Dr. … The jury was faced with three alternatives, and the verdict form indicated clearly the number required to return each of the three alternative verdicts.

Terlyuk v. Krasnogorov

237 Or. App. 546 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 29, 2010

Defendant asserts that plaintiffs’ textual and contextual construction of ORCP 71 B(1)(a) is inconsistent with the grammatical structure of the phrase, which clearly sets forth four distinct grounds for setting aside a judgment … We need not determine what type of mistake, surprise, or inadvertence qualifies under the rule in this case because we conclude that defendant’s conduct was excusably neglectful.

State v. Meyer

120 Or. App. 319 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 19, 1993

Article I, section 20, provides: “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.” … The definition of “lewd” in ORS 163.670 and ORS 163.673 — exciting the lust or sexual desires of the viewer — is wholly consistent with the gist of those definitions and clearly harmonizes with them.

Rocky B. Fisheries, Inc. v. North Bend Fabrication & MacHine, Inc.

66 Or. App. 625 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 25, 1984

“In adopting ORS 29.020 to 29.075, the legislature established procedural requirements for all types of provisional process, with respect to all of which judicial intervention is necessary and, except for extraordinary circumstances … Attachment and garnishment are clearly provisional processes covered by the 1973 statutory scheme; seizure of a vessel to perfect a statutory lien is not.

Wheaton v. Kulongoski

209 Or. App. 355 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 29, 2006

Medically needy benefits qualify as such assistance, and DHS does not suggest otherwise. … Statutes in that category did not need amendments because they clearly called for contested case hearings.

Miller v. Multnomah County

153 Or. App. 30 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 18, 1998

The text of ORS 197.835(10)(a)(B), viewed in its context, clearly includes only county actions that are taken with the deliberate design of avoiding the requirements of ORS 215.428. … ORS 215.750(l)(c) provides: “In western Oregon, a governing body of a county or its designate may allow the establishment of a single-family dwelling on a lot or parcel located within a forest zone if the lot or parcel is

State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department of Multnomah County v. Cornett

121 Or. App. 264 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 23, 1993

Clearly, Weir was working as a mental health care professional. We now turn to the second and third requirements of Moen . … Clearly, the Mental Health Division considers a “Qualified Mental Health Professional” to be competent to assess relationships and mental status, document diagnostic impressions, treat and counsel in a mental health setting